Sorcery of Thorns by Margaret Rogerson

Synopsis (via Goodreads): All sorcerers are evil. Elisabeth has known that as long as she has known anything. Raised as a foundling in one of Austermeer’s Great Libraries, Elisabeth has grown up among the tools of sorcery—magical grimoires that whisper on shelves and rattle beneath iron chains. If provoked, they transform into grotesque monsters of ink and leather. She hopes to become a warden, charged with protecting the kingdom from their power.

Then an act of sabotage releases the library’s most dangerous grimoire. Elisabeth’s desperate intervention implicates her in the crime, and she is torn from her home to face justice in the capital. With no one to turn to but her sworn enemy, the sorcerer Nathaniel Thorn, and his mysterious demonic servant, she finds herself entangled in a centuries-old conspiracy. Not only could the Great Libraries go up in flames, but the world along with them.

As her alliance with Nathaniel grows stronger, Elisabeth starts to question everything she’s been taught—about sorcerers, about the libraries she loves, even about herself. For Elisabeth has a power she has never guessed, and a future she could never have imagined.

𑁋𑁋𑁋

I hesitated before starting Sorcery of Thorns, because I had such neutral feelings about the author's first book (An Enchantment of Ravens). The story was enjoyable, but "didn't wow me like I thought it would." I had no such problems with Sorcery of Thorns, and really liked the world Rogerson created. It was a world that revolved around sentient books and libraries with secret passageways, sorcery and demons, and a girl that defied the odds to save the day (she just had to save herself many, many times before that).

Let's start with my main quibble: We only see two sorcerers. Nathanial is the main sorcerer in this story along with his demon, Silas. There's another sorcerer and his demon, although their presence is more malicious and villainy. Where was everyone else? They had a council or something, right? Why didn't they play a larger role within the story? The world is literally falling apart, and there is only one sorcerer trying to save the day? If other people had magical powers and demons, they should have been front-and-center trying to fight back the baddies. Their absence was a gaping hole in the story that I couldn't ignore. Especially when the people living in Nathaniel's neighbored were all sorcerers.

Moving on! I love the cover for this book! I'm not sure why it's called Sorcery of Thorns, because the only Thorn we see is Nathaniel, and he isn't the main character. Yes, he's an essential element of the story, but he's not always around. I guess we learn a lot about his family's history, but it seems weird that his name is predominately featured while Elisabeth is neglected.

Elisabeth is constantly having to save herself from this or that situation. She eludes an enchantment, gets blamed for something she didn't do, survives confinement, escapes imprisonment, saves a sorcerer, befriends a demon, fights fiends, pretends to be bespelled, challenges her beliefs and teachings, and cleverly solves the mysteries surrounding the attacks on the libraries. Nathaniel who? She does have help from friends, but essentially saves the day all on her own (although I wish she'd dealt with more inner conflict and turmoil). Everyone else is either too far away, too incapacitated, or too bound to something else to offer much assistance.

I really liked Nathaniel and his relationship with Silas, and I think this book would have benefited from having alternating POVs. It would have been interesting too see this story through Nathaniel's perspective, since he kept himself at a distance (emotionally and physically) whenever Elisabeth was around (slow-almost-nonexistent-burn romance). I think seeing inside of his head would have brought more clarity to the story, and allowed us to view the happenings from a sorcerer's perspective.

I also wish the bad guy had been more nefarious, but he was just mildly unsettling. His demon was more calculating and disturbing, and I would've liked to see her go up against Silas. I felt like a lot of details were glossed or skipped over (like how someone was captured, or how they got from here to there), and things would just progress. I wanted to know what happened in those gaps of time. The ending leaves you with a big, "WHAT HAPPENED?"

I do think I enjoyed this one more because I listened to the audiobook. I don't think I would have had the patience for it otherwise. Having a due date also helped (borrowed from the library). The narrator was fantastic! I feel like this one was a solid 3.5 stars, but will round up until Goodreads develops a half-star rating.

An Enchantment of Ravens by Margaret Rogerson

Narrated by Julia Whelan

Synopsis (via Goodreads): A skilled painter must stand up to the ancient power of the faerie courts—even as she falls in love with a faerie prince—in this gorgeous debut novel.

Isobel is a prodigy portrait artist with a dangerous set of clients: the sinister fair folk, immortal creatures who cannot bake bread, weave cloth, or put a pen to paper without crumbling to dust. They crave human Craft with a terrible thirst, and Isobel’s paintings are highly prized. But when she receives her first royal patron—Rook, the autumn prince—she makes a terrible mistake. She paints mortal sorrow in his eyes—a weakness that could cost him his life.

Furious and devastated, Rook spirits her away to the autumnlands to stand trial for her crime. Waylaid by the Wild Hunt’s ghostly hounds, the tainted influence of the Alder King, and hideous monsters risen from barrow mounds, Isobel and Rook depend on one another for survival. Their alliance blossoms into trust, then love—and that love violates the fair folks’ ruthless laws. Now both of their lives are forfeit, unless Isobel can use her skill as an artist to fight the fairy courts. Because secretly, her Craft represents a threat the fair folk have never faced in all the millennia of their unchanging lives: for the first time, her portraits have the power to make them feel. 

“Frankly, I had no idea how anyone knew if they were in love in the first place. Was there ever a single thread a person could pick out from the knot and say “Yes—I am in love—here’s the proof!” or was it always caught up in a wretched tangle of ifs and buts and maybes?”

An Enchantment of Ravens was a somewhat enjoyable read. I felt like I spent the entire book doing one of two things: watching Isobel paint or walking through the woods. At first I enjoyed the descriptions of curves and colors, but then I think my mind started to skip over those details. They were lovely illustrations, but there were a lot of them.

Rook and Isobel have an odd relationship that doesn't always make sense. I felt like I was picking a flower and saying, "She loves me, she loves me not. She loves me..." I never knew how they truly felt about each other, but somehow everyone else did. I wish we had learned more about Rook's raven pendant (and the story behind it), because I feel like that would have answered a lot of my questions. Isobel seemed very isolated from the world, but savvy in the ways of faerie. People were awed by her Craft and proximity to the Fair Folk, but she didn't seem to have single friend. 

I was really disappointed when it felt like I was always one-step ahead of the characters. It was a little frustrating waiting for them to figure things out, and honestly I thought Rook would have been more knowledgeable about his world. It seems like a lot of things happen that he isn't prepared for, yet he's a Prince of Faerie. He's supposed to be crazy powerful, but we don't see him use that power too often, and never when it's needed.

Overall, I liked the story. I feel like things either didn't make sense, or they clicked into place too easily. An Enchantment of Ravens just didn't wow me like I thought it would.